KY. man shoots down drone...

[Omega]

I first seen this on another site. There I agreed with another post, if you are within shotgun distance above my property you are invading my privacy.  While you may not be able to see details, there is enough to determine what I have back there.  While google images do much the same thing, they are static and nobody at google is looking to see if you have a nice zero turn under the car port for later that night.  There is no reason to be hovering over anyone's property without permission; roof inspections, realtor walkthroughs and maybe even pictures for land owner are by permission so no issue there.  I understand sometimes one of those can go off course, and I am not advocating shooting them all down but if one makes you uneasy then its game on. 

[Hozzie]

Omega, I don't disagree.  If one is just sitting there obviously zoning in on something on your property, I say it's fair game.  I don't want anyone to think I approve of that kind of use.

[peejman]

This just occurred to me....   This is the classic case of "he who calls first, wins."

 

The Dad should have called 911 and reported it when his daughter first told him.  He could have even told the operator, "If this thing comes back before you get here, I'm gonna blow it out of the sky." and shot it down anyway.

 

But since he didn't call and the drone owner did, he's the one in jail instead of the peeping tom drone operator. 

 

So the lesson is... call it in. 

[Ugly]

The article I read said 5 yards were being surveilled. Including flying the drone low enough to see what one family was doing under their canopy, less than 15' off the ground.

These guys were surely checking out the 16yr olds and should be held accountable for their perv actions. They won't though, the father is the criminal for firing his shotgun in the city.

4 guys came to collect the drone with chests out, the father was wearing a 40cal and told them if they come on his property, there will be another shot :). They turned and left then called the popo.

[Sam1]

Hope the trespass thing works out for him. They could've been scoping out for a future B&E, spying on the girls & now someone strapped a pistol to one, who's to say he didn't do it out of fear of that?

I don't understand the obsession with those things, if it was only about flying,they could do it on public or empty property. I would assume that a good portion of these exist for the sole purpose of people being nosey and not for entertainment.

[Omega]

Omega, I don't disagree.  If one is just sitting there obviously zoning in on something on your property, I say it's fair game.  I don't want anyone to think I approve of that kind of use.

No, not trying to say you do.  I know there are valid reasons to own and operate personal drones, they even sell a decent one at rural king which I think they list deer scouting as one use.

 

The article I read said 5 yards were being surveilled. Including flying the drone low enough to see what one family was doing under their canopy, less than 15' off the ground.

These guys were surely checking out the 16yr olds and should be held accountable for their perv actions. They won't though, the father is the criminal for firing his shotgun in the city.

4 guys came to collect the drone with chests out, the father was wearing a 40cal and told them if they come on his property, there will be another shot :). They turned and left then called the popo.

I think he has a reasonable defense in the fact that the law says firing a weapon in defense of property is an exemption to the law. 

Now that drones are becoming an everyday item, there are surely some rules that need to be followed and cases such as this will get the government involved to develop some whether we like them or not.

[Hozzie]

Hope the trespass thing works out for him. They could've been scoping out for a future B&E, spying on the girls & now someone strapped a pistol to one, who's to say he didn't do it out of fear of that?

I don't understand the obsession with those things, if it was only about flying,they could do it on public or empty property. I would assume that a good portion of these exist for the sole purpose of people being nosey and not for entertainment.

 

That's like saying a good portion of guns only exist for people to shoot people.  This couldn't be farther from the truth.

 

Go out to a quadcopter forum and do some reading.  You will see most quad owners despise situations like this more than anyone.  I would use the analogy, a gun doesn't shoot people, people do.  Same with a quad.   Anytime there is new technology out there, some people will abuse it.  

Edited July 30, 2015 by Hozzie

[bersaguy]

The way I look at it if it can't fly over the White House, It can't fly over my house with out danger of being shot down. I have my right to privacy and should be able to protect my own airspace just like they do the White House. They have been having issues with drones flying out west and endangering planes flying water and fire retardant to fight forests fires and they have actually had to stop flights till they can get the drone operators to quit flying. I think they should have arrested anyone they caught flying out there. .............jmho

[JAB]

Well, the would-be superspys must have seen things in pretty good detail as they saw enough detail to know who shot their drone down as they later came to his house, calling him an 'S.O.B.' and so on.  Personally, I would have blasted the thing out of the sky and then practiced the three 'S's (shoot, shovel and stfu.)  "Drone?  What drone?  I have no idea what you are talking about.  Surely you weren't using a drone to invade my family's privacy."

[vontar]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/colorado-town-vote-license-shoot-drones-article-1.1543030

 

 

Skeet with prizes.

 

[bersaguy]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/colorado-town-vote-license-shoot-drones-article-1.1543030

 

 

Skeet with prizes.

 

I'm not exactly sure this is the type of drone they are talking about. This particular drones don't hover over someones back yard and they fly a lot higher than you would be able to shoot down with anything short of Shoulder mounted missile. Plus if you get caught they might just blow your house up and declare you a home grown Terrorist...........jmho

[K191145]

.

 

What if a person were somehow hovering 50 yards over your backyard -- would you not feel an invasion of privacy?

 

 

 

- OS

 

Some good beanbag loads would do for that, I would give them strike 1 but I don't give strike 2's. Well I guess strike 2 would be low brass #9 shot, not lethal at a distance but painful and hours in the ER getting hundreds picked out of their arse.  :) 

[vontar]

if we can't shoot them down, maybe we get cheap drones and fly in to them.  I swear it was an accident.

 

Or we update trunk money to yard chimpanzee.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_zw8h4epQM

Edited July 30, 2015 by vontar

[shotgunshooter]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/colorado-town-vote-license-shoot-drones-article-1.1543030


Skeet with prizes.

If we want to get technical, it would closer to FITASC.

[Sam1]

That's like saying a good portion of guns only exist for people to shoot people. This couldn't be farther from the truth.

Go out to a quadcopter forum and do some reading. You will see most quad owners despise situations like this more than anyone. I would use the analogy, a gun doesn't shoot people, people do. Same with a quad. Anytime there is new technology out there, some people will abuse it.

Can't use the gun argument comparison on this one. If someone decides to exercise their 2a rights by brandishing a rifle and floating 20 feet over my backyard while my daughters were outside, there would be much more than a drone shot down that day.

If it's about flying drones, do it over your own property or public property, not over someone else's privately owned property. There's no issue I have with people flying drones, just like I have no issue with people having gun buster signs in their business. Similar laws should apply.

[bersaguy]

Drones without cameras flying over someones property would be different but camera's make it invasion of privacy in my opinion... :ugh: :ugh:

[DaveTN]

The guy said he didn't know if the drone was looking at the girls or not. The drone wasn't on or over his property when he shot it. If the value of the drone is over a certain amount it could be a felony and the guy could lose his gun rights. He sounds like the kind of irresponsible nut case that doesn't need to have a gun and gives all gun owners a bad name; we will see how it pans out in court.
 
If there is some law the operator violated he needs to held accountable.
 
I bought a small drone to learn on before I purchase a bigger one to use for entertainment and photography. Not everyone that flies a drone is a perv because there happens to be girls in the area, or a burglar because that explanation best fits the needs of a reckless neighbor.
 
I doubt the guy will go to jail, but I bet it will cost him enough that he will wish he never walked outside and criminally damaged property that was of no threat to him. He could lose his gun rights and that is what he deserves.

[Ted S.]

The guy said he didn't know if the drone was looking at the girls or not. The drone wasn't on or over his property when he shot it. If the value of the drone is over a certain amount it could be a felony and the guy could lose his gun rights. He sounds like the kind of irresponsible nut case that doesn't need to have a gun and gives all gun owners a bad name; we will see how it pans out in court.
 
If there is some law the operator violated he needs to held accountable.
 
I bought a small drone to learn on before I purchase a bigger one to use for entertainment and photography. Not everyone that flies a drone is a perv because there happens to be girls in the area, or a burglar because that explanation best fits the needs of a reckless neighbor.
 
I doubt the guy will go to jail, but I bet it will cost him enough that he will wish he never walked outside and criminally damaged property that was of no threat to him. He could lose his gun rights and that is what he deserves.

 

From the article:

 

 

Merideth came outside with a shotgun and saw the drone over the neighbor’s yard and determined not to shoot unless it came back over his property. He said, “Within a minute or so, here it came. It was hovering over top of my property, and I shot it out of the sky.”

Edited July 30, 2015 by Ted S.

[Hozzie]

This all comes down to how close it was for me.  It was obviously within shotgun range, so that is pretty close.  Saying that a drone shouldn't fly over your property at all isn't realistic.   The long term question is what should be considered acceptable.  Attached is a good example of a flight I did where I obviously flew over others property.  I went out about 1.4 miles from where I was controlling it.  Am I wrong for doing this at this height?  I don't think so, but some of you may disagree. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_H-MQ90dc9U

[2.ooohhh]

The landsat imagery I have access to from satellite overflies of most of the US is MUCH higher resolution at ground level than my drone at 100+ feet and typically only a few days old so some of you may want to readjust your idea of privacy in your backyard. The only thing giving you any real privacy from our own satellites is the fact that there are MANY back yards in the country that get imagery every day, so it's essentially security via obscurity. Even when we were given the imagery from days after the Nashville floods one of our teams stumbled on someone tanning nude on an apartment roof downtown while trying to show where the river water was receding day by day.

 

 

I got the drone for real time checks of tornado tracks when working with the red cross. From 400 feet the drone can pinpoint damaged houses and properties along a track in minutes where it might have taken several hours for a team to do the same by car for a longer track. Also b/c the drone has GPS accuracy to within around 18 inches of it's location I can hand still images over to property owners that they can use for insurance claim purposes as well. Getting in or around a house at 15-50 feet is dangerous anyway due to trees, power lines, and such. I actually crashed mine about 10 min after checking my neighbor's roof trying to get a good inspection of a broken tree limb that was still attached to the tree on my property.

[Oh Shoot]

....

I think he has a reasonable defense in the fact that the law says firing a weapon in defense of property is an exemption to the law. 

...

 

What law is that? Something specific to Kentucky? Or the city he's in?

 

- OS

Edited July 30, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[Sam1]

What law is that? Something specific to Kentucky? Or the city he's in?

- OS

Iirc back home in KY you can shoot through the door now if you're in fear, don't have to wait until they make it inside. It may be tied into that somehow.

[Oh Shoot]

Iirc back home in KY you can shoot through the door now if you're in fear, don't have to wait until they make it inside. It may be tied into that somehow.

 

In TN too in some cases, as porch is part of your dwelling. But that has to do with deadly force to protect life and limb, not to protect property.

 

Are you suggesting that the drone meets the same test as using deadly force against a person?

 

- OS

[gjohnsoniv]

Are you suggesting that the drone meets the same test as using deadly force against a person?

- OS

Guess that depends on how good your lawyer is.

[KahrMan]

Last September the NTSB ruled that all drones fit the federal definition of an aircraft in the FAA vs Pirker case.  So another issue this gentleman may face is that technically he broke Federal law by shooting down an aircraft.  Whether or not the feds will go after him remain to be seen but it is another aspect to think about before you shoot a drone out of the sky.